I presented at the local planetary journal club this morning about the 3 articles I co-authored for The Conversation in the past weeks about the effects that one million satellites would have on the night sky, the atmosphere, and the orbital environment (spoiler alert: all very very bad)
And one on light pollution that I thought would get published today but might not be out until after the weekend.
The third article in this (horrible) series of articles I've co-authored is now out. https://theconversation.com/a-million-new-spacex-satellites-will-destroy-the-night-sky-for-everyone-on-earth-277938
A million satellites of the size required for "AI data centers" would mean that everyone in the world would have more visible satellites than stars for most of the night and most of the year.
But don't worry, we'll be in Kessler Syndrome WAY before we get to a million satellites!
RE: https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/116152057176915428
I've got a thread here where I more carefully explain the prediction plot, and post a bunch of sky predictions for many latitudes around the world, just to make the point of how incredibly stupid the idea of a million satellites is.
Plus they are hugely vulnerable to any number of disruptions, including to anyone with a launcher and a bucket of ball bearings.
Anyone who thinks these won't be a target in future wars isn't paying attention to the way infrastructure is destroyed in modern asymmetric warfare – despite the fact we have an object lesson going right now. And the number of small nations with a big enough launcher increases every year.
Yeah. One good Starlink hit could trigger a whole Kessler Syndrome cascade.
And I really doubt Musk has them insured for 'acts of war'. (If he has them insured at all.)
I'm also surprised North Korea hasn't threatened to do something like this.
Prof. Sam Lawler
Jack William Bell
James Helferty